I 

  

Hanley, Jennifer 

From: Lance Meyer

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2022 8:29 AM

To: Czarnecki, Julia 

Cc: Hanley, Jennifer 

Subject: RE: Logistics Park of North Dakota CRISI Grant 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

CAUTION: [EXTERNAL] This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments 

unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 

Julia:

We do not have any comments.

Regards,

Lance Meyer, P.E. 

Office Phone: 

City of Minot, City Engineer 

From: Czarnecki, Julia

Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2022 3:50 PM

To: Lance Meyer

Cc: Hanley, Jennifer

Subject: Logistics Park of North Dakota CRISI Grant

Caution: This message has originated from an External Source. 

Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this 

email. 

Dear Mr. Meyer,

The North Dakota Department of Transportation (NDDOT) has been selected to receive funding under the U.S.

Department of Transportation’s (USDOT)

Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) federal grant program to enhance the Logistics Park of

North Dakota (LPND) located in Minot, North Dakota, within Ward County. We are soliciting your agency’s review and

comments on the proposed project. Please provide us with any issues or information regarding your agency’s interests

in this project.

Thank you!

Julia Czarnecki 

Environmental Scientist 

1
HDR 

101 S. Philips Avenue, Suite 401 

Sioux Falls SD 57104 

D 

hdrinc.com/follow-us 

2 
   

                                       

             

                             

  

 

 

 

Hanley, Jennifer 

From: Anderson, Fred J. 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2022 9:10 AM

To: Hanley, Jennifer 

Subject: N.D. Geological Survey: Geologic Review of Proposed Logistics Park of North Dakota - No Concerns 

Noted 

CAUTION: [EXTERNAL] This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments 

unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 

Ms. Hanley,

I have reviewed the comment solicitation letter of November 14, 2022 for this project and would not note any geologic

concerns with the project at this time.

Geologic maps and data sets for this project area can be found on our website

at: https://www.dmr.nd.gov/ndgs/surfacegeo/

Regards,

Fred J. Anderson 

Geologist, North Dakota Geological Survey 

• 701.328.8037 (Office 

Direct) • • www.dmr.nd.gov/ndgs 

701.328.8000 (Survey Main Office) 

701.328.8020 (Front Office) • oilandgasinfo@nd.gov • www.dmr.nd.gov • 600 E Boulevard Ave, Dept. 

405 • Bismarck, ND 58505 

1
r 

Subject: Logistics Park of North Dakota CRISI Grant 

Hanley, Jennifer 

From: Spangelo, Kayla M. 

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2022 12: 14 PM 

To: Czarnecki, Julia 

Cc: Hanley, Jennifer; Papalichev, Elvedina; DUPPONG, SHARI 

Subject: RE: Logistics Park of North Dakota CRISI Grant 

CAUTION: [EXTERNAL] This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments 

unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 

Good morning, 

NDDTL does not manage any surface estate interested in the proposed project area. 

Please let me know if you have any questions. 

Thank you, 

Kayla Spangelo 

Natural Resources Professional - Rights ofWays 

  • • land.nd.gov • 1707 N 9th St • Bismarck, ND 58501

From: Czarnecki, Julia 

Sent: Thursday, Novem 

To: Spangelo, Kayla M. 

Cc: Hanley, Jennifer 

••••• CAUTION: This email originated from an outside source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know 

they are safe. • •• •• 

Dear Mrs. Spangelo, 

The North Dakota Department of Transportation (NDDOT) has been selected to receive funding under the U.S. 

Department of Transportation's (USDOT) 

Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) federal grant program to enhance the Logist ics Park of 

North Dakota (LPND) located in M inot, North Dakota, within Ward County. We are soliciting your agency' s review and 

comments on the proposed project. Please provide us with any issues or information regarding your agency's interests 

in this project by December 17, 2022. 

Thank you ! 

1 
Julia Czarnecki 

Environmental Scientist 

HDR 

101 S. Philips Avenue, Suite 401 

Sioux Falls, SD 57104 

D 

hdrinc.com/follow-us 

2 
November 23, 2022 

Jennifer Hanley, P.E. 

Environmental Project Manager 

HDR Inc 

51 N Broadway, Suite 550 

Fargo, ND 58102-4970 

Re: Logistics Park of Minot North Dakota, RR enhancements in Ward County 

Dear Mrs. Hanley: 

The North Dakota Depaiiment of Environmental Quality has reviewed the information concerning 

the above-referenced project received at the department on November 17, 2022 with respect to 

possible environmental impacts. 

This department believes that environmental impacts from the proposed construction will be minor 

and can be controlled by proper construction methods. With respect to construction, we have the 

following comments: 

1. Aggregate to be used for road construction should not contain any erionite. Aggregate sources 

should be tested for erionite following guidelines found at https://deg.nd.gov/erionite. For 

questions regarding erionite testing, please contact the Asbestos Program at 701-328-5166 or 

asbestos@nd.gov. 

2. Care is to be taken during construction activity near any water ofthe state to minimize adverse 

effects on a water body. This includes minimal disturbance of stream beds and banks to 

prevent excess siltation, and the replacement and revegetation of any disturbed area as soon 

as possible after work has been completed. Caution must also be taken to prevent spills of oil 

and grease that may reach the receiving water from equipment maintenance, and/or the 

handling of fuels on the site. Guidelines for minimizing degradation to waterways dw-ing 

construction are attached. 

3. Projects disturbing one or more acres are required to have a permit to discharge stormwater 

runoff until the site is stabilized by the reestablishment of vegetation or other permanent 

cover. Further info1mation on the stormwater permit may be obtained from the department's 

website or by calling the Division of Water Quality (701-328-5210). The City of Minot may 

require post-construction practices to address stormwater quality by ordinance or as part of 

its NDPDES Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) General Permit 

obligations. Check with local officials to be sure local MS4 Program considerations are 

addressed. 

4. The construction project overlies the Souris River glacial drift aquifer, which is a sensitive 

groundwater area. Care should be taken to avoid spills of any materials that may have an 

918 East Divide Avenue Bismarck ND 58501-1947 Fax 701-328-5200 deq .nd .gov 

Director's Office Division of Division of Division of Division of Division of Chemistry 

701-328-5150 Air Quality Municipal Facilities Waste Management Water Quality 701-328-6140 

701-328-5188 701-328-5211 701-328-5166 701-328-5210 2635 East Main Ave 

Bismarck ND 58501 
Ms. Hanley 2 November 23, 2022 

adverse effect on groundwater quality. All spills must be immediately reported to this 

department and appropriate remedial actions performed. 

5. All solid waste materials must be managed and transported in accordance with the state's solid 

and hazardous waste rules. Appropriate efforts to reduce, reuse and/or recycle waste materials 

are strongly encouraged. As appropriate, segregation of inert waste from non-inert waste can 

generally reduce the cost of waste management. Further information on waste management 

and recycling is available from the department's Division of Waste Management at 

(701) 328-5166. 

These comments are based on the information provided about the project in the above-referenced 

submittal. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may require a water quality certification from this 

department for the project if the project is subject to their Section 404 permitting process. Any 

additional information which may be required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under the 

process will be considered by this department in our determination regarding the issuance of such 

a certification. 

The department owns no land in or adjacent to the proposed improvements, nor does it have any 

projects scheduled in the area. In addition, we believe the proposed activities are consistent with 

the State Implementation Plan for the Control of Air Pollution for the State of North Dakota. 

Ifyou have any questions regarding our comments, please feel free to contact this office. 

Sincerely, 

L. David Glatt, P.E., Director 

North Dakota Department ofEnvironmental Quality 

LDG:csc 

Attach. 
Construction and Environmental Disturbance Requirements 

The following are the minimum requirements of the North Dakota Department of Environmental 

Quality for projects that involve construction and environmental disturbance in or near waters of 

the State ofNorth Dakota. They ensure that minimal environmental degradation occurs as a result 

of construction or related work which has the potential to affect waters of the state. All projects 

must be constructed to minimize the loss of soil, vegetative cover, and pollutants ( chemical or 

biological) from a site. 

Soils 

Prevent the erosion and sediment loss using erosion and sediment controls. Fragile and sensitive 

areas such as wetlands, riparian zones, delicate flora, and land resources must be prohibited against 

compaction, vegetation loss and unnecessary damage. 

Surface Waters 

All construction must be managed to minimize impacts to aquatic systems. Follow safe storage 

and handling procedures to prevent the contamination of water from fuel spills, lubricants, and 

chemicals. Stream bank and stream bed disturbances must be contained to minimize silt 

movement, nutrient upsurges, plant dislocations, and any physical chemicals, or biological 

disruption. The use of pesticides or herbicides in or near surface waters is allowed under the 

department's pesticide application permit with notification to the department. 

Fill Material 

Any fill material place below the ordinary high-water mark must be free oftopsoil, decomposable 

materials, and persistent synthetic organic compounds; including, but not limited to, asphalt, tires, 

treated lumber, and construction debris. The department may require testing of fill material. All 

temporary fills must be removed. Debris and solid waste must be properly disposed or recycled. 

Impacted areas must be restored to near original condition. 
 

From: Olsen, Levi 

To: Hanley, Jennifer 

Subject: Logistics Park of North Dakota 

Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 8:24:36 PM 

CAUTION: [EXTERNAL] This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open 

attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 

Jennifer, 

This email is to inform you that WAPA does not have any nearby facilities that will be impacted by 

the Logistics Park of North Dakota in Minot as outlined in the letter and plat provided. 

We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on your future plans. 

Thank You, 

Levi Olsen, CPL | Realty Specialist | Landman 

Western Area Power Administration 

Upper Great Plains Region | 

(M) | 
December 13, 2022 

Jennifer Hanley 

HOR 

51 N Broadway, STE 550 

Fargo, ND 58102-4970 

Dear Ms. Hanley: 

This is in response to your request for a review of the environmental impacts associated the 

Logistics Park of North Dakota project located in Minot, ND. 

The proposed project has been reviewed by Department of Water Resources, and the following 

comments are provided: 

- There is a FEMA National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulatory floodplain 

identified or mapped where this proposed project is to take place (Flood Insurance Rate 

Map panel number 38027C0200C). Impacted areas are designated to be in NFIP Zone 

A. North Dakota has no formal NFIP permitting authority, as all NFIP permitting 

decisions are considered by impacted NFIP participating communities, which is the 

community with zoning authority for the area in question. Please work directly with the 

local floodplain administrator of the zoning authority impacted to achieve NFIP and 

community compliance. 

- The Mouse River is considered navigable and therefore sovereign to the state of North 

Dakota. Any project which falls below, under or over navigable water bodies in North 

Dakota requires authorization from the Department of Water Resources. Please see the 

included form SFN-61408 "Authorization to Construct a Project Within Sovereign Lands 

of North Dakota." Completing the permit application is a relatively simple process that 

includes completion of the form, submittal of a map, and a simple diagram of what the 

project may involve. There is no fee for the permit, we recommend about 90 days for 

processing, and the permit lasts for the life of the project includi~inthe 

original footprint. For any question, please contact Tia Jones at

- The Department of Water Resources' (DWR) Engineering and Permitting Section 

reviewed the project location and determined that the project likely does not require a 

surface drain permit or construction permit unless the project impacts sloughs, ponds, 

lakes (i.e., wetlands) outside of the roads' right-of-way or so long as any watercourses 

are not modified (i.e., deepened, widened, rerouted, etc.) However, the DWR strongly 

recommends that the new structures comply with the North Dakota Stream Crossings 

Standards. For more information on these requirements, please visit the Regulation & 

Appropriation tab on the DWR's website (dwr.nd.gov) or contact the DWR's Regulatory 

Division at 701-328-4956 or dwrregpermits@nd.gov. 

- Initial review indicates the project does not require a conditional or temporary permit for 

water appropriation. However, if surface water or groundwater will be diverted for 

1200 Memorial Hwy I Bismarck, ND 58504 I 701.328.2750 I DWR.nd.gov 
Authorization to Construct a Project Within

Sovereign Lands of North Dakota




December 21, 2022 

Ref: 8ORA-N 

Jennifer Hanley, Environmental Project Manager

HDR Inc.

51 N. Broadway, Suite 550 

Fargo, North Dakota 58102‐4970

RE: Notice of intent (NOI) for development of the Logistics Park of North Dakota 

Dear Ms. Hanley: 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 has received your November 16, 2022, 

notification of a proposal for development of the Logistics Park of North Dakota (LPND), located in 

Minot, North Dakota, within Ward County. The North Dakota Department of Transportation, in 

partnership with the Minot Area Chamber Economic Development Corporation, is seeking to enhance 

the regional intermodal transport network to meet anticipated user needs of North Dakota and 

surrounding states through increased transport capacity, container storage, loading, transferring, and 

transloading. The project would be funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Consolidated 

Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) grant program, administered by the Federal 

Railroad Administration. In accordance with our responsibilities under Section 102(2)(C) of the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), we are providing the enclosed comments to assist in the 

development of an environmental document. 

Areas of consideration to meet NEPA requirements include: 

Purpose and Need

The EPA recommends that the NEPA document for the proposed project clearly identify the underlying 

purpose and need (40 CFR § 1502.13). The purpose and need should be a clear objective statement of 

the rationale for the proposed project as it provides the basis for identifying project alternatives. The 

purpose of the proposed action is typically the specific objective(s) of the activity. The need for the 

proposed action may be to eliminate a broader underlying problem or take advantage of an opportunity. 

Please describe the short and long-term transportation needs as well as the reasoning behind and the 

information that supports those needs. We recommend the alternatives include a thorough discussion of 

the utilities and infrastructure including water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, electrical, gas, and 

communications required to support the development of the LPND facilities.

Water Resources

The EPA considers the protection of water and aquatic resources a critical issue to be addressed in 

NEPA analyses for transportation projects. Initial review of the area indicates the presence of palustrine, 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION 8

1595 Wynkoop Street

Denver, CO 80202-1129

Phone 800-227-8917

www.epa.gov/region8
2

forested, temporarily flooded (PFOA), and various palustrine, emergent (PEMx) wetland areas. We 

recommend the NEPA document include in the scope of analysis impacts to water resources, including 

wetlands, riparian habitat, vegetated shallows, surface water and groundwater movement, and nearby 

stream morphology and water quality. We also recommend discussing any National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permits needed under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). 

We recommend coordinating with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) about this project to 

determine whether it may require either an individual or nationwide CWA Section 404 permit. A permit 

would be needed if the work involves a discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S., 

including jurisdictional wetlands. If an individual permit is required, only the least environmentally 

damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) may be permitted; therefore, we recommend the NEPA 

document include analysis sufficient to ensure its identification. 

Wastewater Discharge

Discussion of drinking water supply, wastewater, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer needs is important to 

address indirect and cumulative impacts that will affect the City of Minot utilities and infrastructure. 

According to the current North Dakota Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NDPDES) permit, 

Minot Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) ND0022896, the City of Minot currently has an average 

daily effluent flow ranging from 1.7 – 6.9 MGD and has no significant industrial users as defined in the 

permit application. Therefore, the city is not required to have an approved pretreatment program. 

Expansion of the regional intermodal transport network will increase wastewater needs and industrial 

users. As such, facility upgrades to the City of Minot WWTP may be required. These anticipated 

connections to the WWTP, the increased chemical demands, and wastewater discharges should be 

analyzed as reasonably foreseeable effects to the City of Minot. 

In addition, we recommend the NEPA document provide information on the anticipated service 

connections for the current and projected rail facilities in the industrial park, as well as the planned nonrail facilities. This would benefit the city in determining the impacts from the proposed project and the 

permitting requirements specified in 40 CFR §122.44(j)(1) (Pretreatment program for POTWs) if there 

will be significant industrial users in their area.

Construction Stormwater

Under the CWA NPDES stormwater program, a permit is required for discharges from construction 

activities that disturb one or more acres and discharges from smaller sites that are part of a larger 

common plan of development. Depending on the construction site's location, the state or EPA will 

administer the permit. We recommend obtaining all permits before breaking ground to ensure 

compliance with the CWA. We recommend that the NEPA document discuss applicable stormwater 

permitting requirements and specific mitigation measures that would be required to reduce adverse 

impacts to water quality and aquatic resources, including: 

• A list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be required to protect surface water and 

groundwater resources. These could include silt fences, detention ponds, and other stormwater 

control measures, as well as measures to prevent any associated construction or railroad 

contaminants from entering waters of the U.S.; 

• A discussion of the circumstances under which the BMPs would be applied (e.g., proximity to 

surface water resources, presence of erosive soils, slope, shallow water aquifers, the proximity of 

water wells, etc.); and
3

• Identification of the entity responsible for BMP installation and maintenance and an explanation 

of how the responsible entity would ensure that the BMPs would be monitored and enforced.

Air Quality

The project anticipates a considerable amount of earth works to be completed, as well as the 

construction of various facilities to be utilized for this project. To minimize the environmental impacts 

of construction-related work, EPA recommends the project identify actions to minimize the impacts to 

local air quality, especially any fugitive dust and diesel emissions. At a minimum, EPA recommends 

including in the NEPA document discussion of the following information about the surrounding airshed: 

• Interference with the maintenance or attainment of any state or federal ambient air quality 

standard in the analysis area that may result from this project.

• Exposure of nearby populations and sensitive receptors to increased levels of diesel particulate 

matter and other air toxics, especially during construction phases which utilize heavy equipment. 

• Considerations of potential mitigation measures for construction equipment and fugitive dust that 

may lessen the severity of the air impacts on the local environment. 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change

The transportation sector emits the highest amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of all the U.S. 

sectors, with the rail sector contributing 2% of those emissions. Consistent with Executive Order 14008 

– Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad – the EPA recommends that NEPA document 

assess, disclose, and mitigate the climate pollution and related effects and risks resulting from the 

proposed action. We recommend using the CEQ’s 2016 Final Guidance for Federal Departments and 

Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in National 

Environmental Policy Act Reviews1 as a resource for analyzing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 

opportunities to reduce those emissions, climate impacts on the planning area, and climate change 

adaptation and resilience strategies. 

We recommend including an estimate of the direct and indirect GHG emissions associated with the 

project, and an analysis of alternatives and/or identification of practicable mitigation to reduce project

related GHG emissions. In addition to emissions associated with project construction, development, and 

operation, we recommend calculating reasonably foreseeable upstream and downstream emissions that 

could be attributable to the project. For the analysis, we suggest the following general approach: 

• Include a summary discussion of ongoing and projected regional climate change relevant to the 

project area, based on U.S. Global Change Research Program assessments. This would enable 

the environmental report to identify impacts that may be exacerbated by climate change.

• Estimate the anticipated direct and indirect GHG emissions associated with the project. The 

NEPA.gov website2 includes a non-exhaustive list of GHG accounting tools available to 

agencies. We also recommend estimating GHG emissions in CO2-equivalent terms and 

translating the emissions into equivalencies that are more easily understood by the public (e.g., 

annual GHG emissions from x number of motor vehicles, see 

https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator).

1 https://www.epa.gov/nepa/climate-change-guidance-national-environmental-policy-act-reviews 2 https://ceq.doe.gov/guidance/ceq_guidance_nepa-ghg.html
4

• Account for the project's climate impacts by utilizing the current interim values for the social 

cost of GHG emissions. The February 2021 Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases Technical Support 

Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under 

Executive Order 139903 (developed by the Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of 

Greenhouse Gases, United States Government) provides the most current information on 

generating these calculations.

• Identify and assess measures to reduce GHG emissions associated with the project, including 

alternatives and/or requirements to mitigate or offset emissions. 

• Discuss how reasonably foreseeable GHG emissions associated with the project are, or are not, 

consistent with state or federal policies or goals. For example, discuss how emissions help or 

hinder meeting GHG reduction targets set at the federal, state, or local level as required in 40 

CFR § 1506.2(d), including the U.S. 2030 Paris GHG reduction target and 2050 net-zero 

pathway.

4 We recommend that the NEPA document avoid percentage comparisons between 

project-level and national or global emissions, which inappropriately minimize the significance 

of planning-level GHG emissions. 

Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898 – Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations 

and Low-Income Populations – applies to federal agencies that conduct activities that substantially 

affect human health or the environment. In addition, Executive Order 13985 – Advancing Racial Equity 

and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government – sets expectations for a 

whole-of-government approach to advancing equity for all. To that end, EJScreen was developed by 

EPA to highlight places that may be candidates for further review, analysis, or outreach to support the 

agency's environmental justice work. However, for the LPND Railroad project, we recommend against 

drawing conclusive decisions based on EJscreen. EJScreen cannot provide data on every environmental 

impact and demographic factor that may be important to any location. Therefore, its initial results should 

be supplemented with additional information and local knowledge whenever appropriate, for a more 

complete picture of a location. Therefore, consistent with these executive orders and CEQ’s 

Environmental Justice Guidance Under NEPA,

5 the EPA recommends the NEPA analysis include the 

following: 

• Meaningful engagement of communities located near the proposed project regarding the 

decisions on the proposed project. 

• Disclosure of the project’s effects on homes and populations located adjacent to the proposed 

LPND expansion area. 

• Consideration of impacts from noise, vibration, dust, and other air emissions during both 

construction and operation. 

• Consideration of impacts from the business and industrial park on traffic, emergency response 

times, neighborhood connectivity, etc. that could warrant analysis. 

3 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2021/02/TechnicalSupportDocument_SocialCostofCarbonMethaneNitrousOxide.pdf

4 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/22/fact-sheet-president-biden-sets-2030-

greenhouse-gas-pollution-reduction-target-aimed-at-creating-good-paying-union-jobs-and-securing-u-s-leadership-on-cleanenergy-technologies/ 5

 Available along with other environmental justice resources at: https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/environmentaljustice-and-national-environmental-policy-act
• Identification of any dispropo1iionately high and adverse environmental or health effects on 

minority, low-income, or tribal populations near the project area. 

• Reasonable alternatives or mitigation that address any such dispropo1iionate impacts. 

Closing 

. You may also conta.ct Matt Hubner, NEPA Lead 

We appreciate the oppo1iunity to provide comments in the early stages of this project and look fo1ward 

to reviewin the NEPA document. If fiuiher ex lanation ofom comments is desired, please contact me at 

Sincerely, 

Melissa W. McCoy, Ph.D. 

Manager, NEPA Branch 

Office ofthe Regional Administrator 

5 
 

______________________________________________________________ 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concurs with your conclusion that this 

project as described will not adversely affect or jeopardize 

federally listed/proposed species nor adversely modify 

designated/proposed critical habitat(s). If the project changes or new 

information becomes available, please contact this office again so potential 

impacts to federally listed species and other trust resources may be 

Supervisor, North Dakota Ecological Services Field Office Date 

reevaluated. Digitally signed by LUKE LUKE TOSO 

Date: 2023.10.06 TOSO 10:43:39 -05'00' 

United States Department of the Interior 

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 

North Dakota Ecological Services Field Office 

3425 Miriam Avenue 

Bismarck, ND 58501-7926 

Phone: (701) 250-4481 Fax: (701) 355-8513 

In Reply Refer To: August 08, 2023 

Project code: 2023-0114165 

Project Name: Logistics Park of ND Expansion 

Subject: Consistency letter for 'Logistics Park of ND Expansion' for specified federally 

threatened and endangered species and designated critical habitat that may occur in 

your proposed project area consistent with the North Dakota Determination Key 

(DKey) for project review and guidance for federally listed species. 

Jennifer Hanley: 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) received on August 08, 2023 your effects 

determination for the 'Logistics Park of ND Expansion' (the Action) using the North Dakota 

DKey for project review and guidance for federally-listed species within the Information for 

Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system. The Service developed this system in accordance with 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 

Based on your answers and the assistance of the Service's North Dakota DKey, you made the 

following effect determination(s) for the proposed Action: 

Species Listing Status Determination 

Dakota Skipper (Hesperia dacotae) Threatened No effect 

Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) Threatened NLAA 

Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa) Threatened NLAA 

Whooping Crane (Grus americana) Endangered No effect 

Consultation with the Service is not complete. The above effect determination(s) becomes 

applicable when the lead federal action agency or designated non-federal representative submits 

them as a request to the Service to rely on the North Dakota DKey in order to satisfy the agency's 

consultation requirements for this project. 

Please provide this consistency letter to the lead Federal action agency or its designated nonfederal representative with a request for its review, and as the agency deems appropriate, to 

submit for concurrence verification through the IPaC system. The lead Federal action agency or 
08/08/2023 IPaC Record Locator: 562-130118651 2

designated non-federal representative should log into IPaC using their agency email account and 

click "Search by record locator." They will need to enter the record locator 562-130118651

In addition to the species listed above, the following species and/or critical habitats may also 

occur in your project area and are not covered by this conclusion:

 Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate

The Service recommends that your agency contact the North Dakota Ecological Services Field 

Office or re-evaluate the project in IPaC if: 1) the scope, timing, duration, or location of the 

proposed project changes, 2) new information reveals the action may affect listed species or 

designated critical habitat; 3) a new species is listed or critical habitat designated. If any of the 

above conditions occurs, additional consultation with the North Dakota Ecological Services Field 

Office should take place before project changes are final or resources committed.

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act(BGEPA): The following resources are provided to 

project proponents and consulting agencies as additional information. Bald and golden eagles are 

not included in this section 7(a)(2) consultation and this information does not constitute a 

determination of effects by the Service.

The Service developed the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines to advise landowners, 

land managers, and others who share public and private lands with Bald Eagles when and under 

what circumstances the protective provisions of the BGEPA may apply to their activities. The 

guidelines should be consulted prior to conducting new or intermittent activity near an eagle nest. 

This document may be downloaded from the following site: https://www.fws.gov/media/ 

national-bald-eagle-management-guidelines-0

To determine if your proposed activity is likely to take or disturb Golden or Bald Eagles, please 

call our office at 702-250-4481 for further review.

If the recommendations detailed in the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines cannot be 

followed, you may apply for a permit to authorize removal or relocation of an eagle nest in 

certain instances. The application form is located at http://www.fws.gov/forms/3-200-72.pdf.
08/08/2023 IPaC Record Locator: 562-130118651 3

Action Description

You provided to IPaC the following name and description for the subject Action.

1. Name

Logistics Park of ND Expansion

2. Description

The following description was provided for the project 'Logistics Park of ND Expansion':

• Two intermodal staging tracks, each capable of holding an 8,000+ foot-long 

intermodal train and two 5,000 foot-long strip tracks immediately west of the 

Intermodal Facility.

• A Patented Infinity Loop track layout servicing the proposed dry bulk, liquid 

bulk, and renewable facilities.

• Dedicated facilities for liquid and dry bulk, renewables, intermodal, and 

transload operations - with rail capacities able to accommodate unit trains.

• Numerous auxiliary tracks to support manifest operations as well miscellaneous 

rail infrastructure to support general rail operations.

• A maintenance facility with vehicle/equipment maintenance bays, a maintenance 

manager office, storage space, and worker restrooms, showers, and lockers.

• A curbed fueling area for maintenance vehicles and temporarily container 

storage.

• Circulation roads for trucks during loading and unloading operations as well as 

to access the intermodal and transload tracks and the warehouse.

• Employee and visitor parking.

• Lighting to illuminate track areas, roadways, work areas, exterior storage areas, 

parking lots, exterior building doors and driveways from dusk to dawn.

• Security cameras mounted on light structures along the perimeter of LPND and 

along the interior of the intermodal, transload, and warehouse areas.

• Approx. eight-foot-tall chain link security fence installed around the LPND 

perimeter.

• Underground utilities including water, sanitary, storm, communications, electric, 

etc.

The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://

www.google.com/maps/@48.2524096,-101.2309037638959,14z
 

-... ~-

"·· 

08/08/2023 IPaC Record Locator: 562-130118651 4 
 

08/08/2023 IPaC Record Locator: 562-130118651 5 

QUALIFICATION INTERVIEW 

1. Is your project a federal project or have a federal nexus (funded, permitted or other 

authorization by a federal agency)? 

Yes 

2. Does your project consist solely of interior or exterior rehabilitation and renovations of 

existing residential, commercial buildings and public facilities? 

Note: These activities may involve exterior painting, replacement of doors, windows, siding or roofing. 

No 

3. Does your project consist solely of work done within the existing footprint of a building 

such as electrical, heating plumbing, basement and foundation repairs? 

No 

4. Does your project consist solely of additions onto an existing structure? 

No 

5. Does your project consist solely of renting or purchasing existing buildings? 

No 

6. Does your project consist solely of demolition of structures within Incorporated City 

Boundaries? 

No 

7. Does your project consist solely of repair or replacement of existing parking lots, 

sidewalks, roads or other paved or graveled surfaces? 

No 

8. Does your project consist solely of repair or replacement or upgrading playground 

equipment? 

No 

9. Is your project a wind farm? 

No 

10. Is your project a new construction on an existing residential infill lot within Incorporated 

City Boundaries? 

No 

11. Are you building overhead power lines? 

No 

12. Are you constructing a communication tower or other permanent structure over 200 feet 

above ground line without guy wires? 

No 

13. Are there any wetlands in your project area? 

Yes 
 

08/08/2023 IPaC Record Locator: 562-130118651 6 

14. Will the project impact a wetland? 

Note: Common impacts to wetlands include filling, grading, removal of vegetation, building construction and 

changes in water levels and drainage patterns. 

Yes 

15. Is your project located entirely within a developed area? 

Note: A developed area is an area that is already paved or supports structures and the only vegetation is limited to 

frequently mowed grass or conventional landscaping. 

No 

16. [Semantic] Does the action area intersect the Dakota Skipper area of influence? 

Automatically answered 

Yes 

17. Is the project area on disturbed land (e.g. urban areas, previously cropped areas, non-native 

haylands, pasture or other grassland that is dominated by non-native species, or in areas 

where trees or shrubs predominate)? 

No 

18. Is the project area on native prairie/grassland? 

Yes 

19. Is there suitable Dakota skipper habitat present, either Type A or Type B Dakota Skipper 

habitat? 

Note: Suitable habitat contains forbs (purple coneflower, violet, asters, purple prairie clover, etc.) along with 

prairie grasses (little and big blue stem, prairie dropseed, and needlegrasses). 

Yes 

20. Will your project involve a broadcast pesticide application including herbicides and 

insecticides? 

No 

21. Does Dakota Skipper occur in the action area? 

If unknown, you can conduct surveys following the 2018 North Dakota Dakota Skipper 

Survey Protocol and return to this key when you have results; or assume presence by 

selecting Yes. 

No 

22. [Semantic] Does the action area intersect the Whooping Crane area of infuence? 

Automatically answered 

Yes 

23. If a whooping crane is spotted within one-mile of construction, will you stop construction 

and immediately call the USFWS North Dakota Ecological Service Office? 

Yes 
 

08/08/2023 IPaC Record Locator: 562-130118651 7 

24. [Semantic] Does the action area intersect the Piping Plover area of infuence? 

Automatically answered 

Yes 

25. Will the project result in changes to river hydrology (i.e. via construction of lock & dams, 

major waterbody diversion/major (over 1,000,000 gallons/day water withdrawals, etc.)? 

No 

26. Is the project a cooling water intake for a power plant regulated under section 316 of the 

Clean Water Act? 

Note: This applies to facilities that are designed to withdraw at least two million gallons per day of cooling water 

from waters of the U.S. 

No 

27. Is this an instream sand and gravel mining project? 

No 

28. Will this project completely cross the Missouri River or Lake Sakakawea? 

Note: This includes project under, over and through the Missouri River or Lake Sakakawea, such as a bridge, 

buried cable and pipelines including HDD pipelines. 

No 

29. Will the project directly impact suitable piping plover nesting habitat? 

Note: Direct impacts include any off road vehicle access including use of mat roads, soil compaction, digging, 

seismic survey, directional drilling, heavy equipment, grading, trenching, placement of fill, vegetation 

management (including removal or maintenance using equipment or chemicals), cultivation, development, etc.) 

No 

30. Will work be conducted within 1⁄2 mile of suitable piping plover nesting habitat. 

No 

31. [Semantic] Does the action area intersect the Rufa Red Knot area of infuence? 

Automatically answered 

Yes 

32. Will the project construction or other impacts occur between April 1-May 31 or between 

August 15-October 31? 

Yes 
 

08/08/2023 IPaC Record Locator: 562-130118651 8 

IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION 

Agency: North Dakota Department of Transportation 

Name: Jennifer Hanley 

Address: 51 N Broadway, Suite 550 

City: Fargo 

State: ND 

Zip: 58102 

Email 

Phone: 

LEAD AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION 

Lead Agency: Federal Railroad Administration 

Name: Brandon Bratcher 

Email: 
STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY HISTORY FOR t,(Jt/lAfOktJ. 

OF NORTH DAKOTA 

December 28, 2021 

Mr. Steven Eberle 

Ackerman-Estvold 

1907 17th St SE 

<inot, ND 58701 

ND SHPO Ref.: 22-5247 "Ackerman-Estvold: A Class Ill Cultural Resource Inventory for the 

Minot lntermodal Rail Yard in Ward County, North Dakota" in portions of [TlSSN R82W 

Sections 8, 16, 17, 21, & 22) MAC 2021.ND.090 

Dear Mr. Eberle, 

We reviewed ND SHPO Ref.: 22-5247 "Ackerman-Estvold: A Class Ill Cultural Resource Inventory 

for the Minot lntermodal Rail Yard in Ward County, North Dakota" in portions of [T155N R82W 

Sections 8, 16, 17, 21, & 22) MAC 2021.ND.090 and find the report by J. Signe Snortland 

acceptable. We concur with a determination of "No Historic Properties Affected" for this 

project provided it takes place in the location and in the manner described in the 

documentation and provided all borrow comes from an approved source. 

Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. Please include the ND SHPO Reference 

number listed above in further correspondence for this specific project. If you have any 

questions please contact Lisa Steckler, Historic Preservation Specialist at or 

Sincerely, 

to,,, William D. Peterson, PhD 

State Historic Preservation Officer 

(North Dakota) 

"' 

North Dakota Heritage Center & State Museum 

612 East Boulevard Avenue 701.328.2666 history.nd.gov 

Bismarck, ND 58505-0830 histsoc@nd.gov statemuseum.nd.gov
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT 

NORTH DAKOTA REGULATORY OFFICE 

3319 UNIVERSITY DRIVE 

BISMARCK, NORTH DAKOTA 58504-7565

May 13, 2022

NWO-2013-01969-BIS

Ackerman-Estvold

Attn: Mr. Kevin Ploof

1907 17th Street SE

Minot, North Dakota 58701

Dear Mr. Ploof:

We are responding to your February 15, 2022 request for an approved jurisdictional 

determination for the Minot Port CRISI site. The 934-acre project site is located in 

Sections 8, 16, 17, 21, and 22, Township 155 North, Range 82 West, Latitude 

48.246005° North, Longitude -101.229327° West, Minot, Ward County, North Dakota.

Based on available information, we have determined that aquatic resources 

identified in your report as Wetlands 1, 2a-g, 4, 10a-b, 11, 12, and OW1-2 are 

jurisdictional waters of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 

These waters are regulated pursuant to the pre-2015 regulatory regime. The pre-2015 

regulatory regime is the 1986 WOTUS regulation, as informed by SWANCC and 2008 

Rapanos Guidance documents.

The aquatic resources identified as Wetlands 3, 5-9, and 13-36 are intrastate 

isolated waters with no apparent interstate or foreign commerce connection. The 

features identified as OW 3-11 are uplands. As such, these resources are not currently 

regulated by the Corps of Engineers. This disclaimer of jurisdiction is only for Section 

404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. Other Federal, State, and local laws may apply to 

your activities. 

An approved (JD) has been completed for the wetland areas identified in your 

request and is enclosed for your information. The JD may also be viewed at our 

website located at: http://www.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Program/NorthDakota/Jurisdictional-Determination.aspx. The JD will be available on the website 

within 30 days. You may also request copies of the supporting materials the Corps 

used in determining this JD. 

This determination is valid for five years from the date of this letter, unless new 

information warrants revision of the determination before the expiration date. If you 

object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps 

regulations at 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 331.
-2-

A Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) and Request for Appeal (RFA) form is 

enclosed. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed 

RFA form to the Northwestern Division Office at the following address: U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division, Attn: Regulatory Appeals Review Officer, 

P.O. Box 2870, Portland, Oregon 97208-2870. 

In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is 

complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR Part 331.5, and that it has 

been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the NAP. Should you decide to 

submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 60 days from the date 

of this letter. It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do 

not object to the determination in this letter. 

You should provide a copy of this letter and notice to all other affected parties, 

including any individual who has an identifiable and substantial legal interest in the 

property. 

We appreciate your feedback. At your earliest convenience, please tell us how we 

are doing by completing the customer service survey found on our website at 

https://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/. 

Please refer to identification number NWO-2013-01969-BIS in any correspondence 

concerning this project. If you have any questions, please contact Amber Inman by 

email at , or telephone at , extension

. For more information regarding our program, please visit our website at 

http://www.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgram/NorthDakota.aspx.

Sincerely,

Toni R. Erhardt 

Senior Project Manager 

North Dakota Regulatory Office

Enclosures


Example package sent to: 

Chair Cooper with Apache Tribe of Oklahoma, President Stiffarm with Fort Belknap Indian Communit y, Chairman Fox 

with Three Affiliated Tribes 

From: Hanley, Jennifer 

Sent: Friday, September 8, 2023 1:53 PM 

Bratcher, Brandon (FRA) 

Steve Eberle 

Subject: Logistics Park of North Dakota (LPND) M inot, Ward County, ND; Section 106 Consultation and 

Notification of Finding of No Historic Properties Affected Apache Tribe of 

Okla homa_Komardley _20230908 

Chair Komardley, 

The Federal Raihoad Administration (FRA) is providing financial assistance to the No1th Dakota 

Deprutment ofTranspo1tation (NDDOT), the City of Minot (City), and the Minot Area Chamber 

Economic Development Corporation (EDC) for the proposed expansion ofthe Logistics Park ofN01th 

Dakota (Project). The Project is located at an approximately 800-acre indust.Iial site in Minot, ND. The 

Project ru·ea is n01th ofWru·d County Road (CR) 12 and framed on the west side by Wru·d County CR 19 

and east side by 55th St.I·eet NE. 

The Project is an unde1taking subject to Section 106 ofthe National Histo1ic Prese1vation Act of 1966, as 

amended, and its implementing regulations 36 CFR Prut 800 (Section 106). The purpose ofthis letter is to 

initiate Section I06 consultation for the Project to detennine ifthere ru·e historic prope1ties ofcultural or 

religious significance to your T1ibe that may be affected by the Project. FRA is available for Govemmentto-Govemment consultation on this Project. 

You can find the FRA consultation letter and suppo1ting info1mation attached. 

Please email your response to Kristen Zschomler at . If you have questions or 

wish to discuss the Project, Klisten can be reached at you for your cooperation on 

the Project. 

Thanks, 

Jen 

Jennifer Hanley, PE• 

Environmental Project Manager 

HDR 

51 North Broadway, Suite 550 

Fargo, ND 58102 

D 

hdrinc.com/follow-us 

'MN, ND, SD, MT and TX 
Example package sent to: 

Chair Cooper with Apache Tribe of Oklahoma, President Stiffarm with Fort Belknap 

Indian Community, Chairman Fox with Three Affiliated Tribes 

Baker, Becky 

From: Hanley, Jennifer 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Notification of Finding of No Historic Properties Affected Apache Tribe of Oklahoma_Cooper_ 

202401 12 

Attachments: LPND _Tribal Letter _20240112Apache T ribeofOklahoma.pdf; LPND Section 106 Letter Attachments.pdf 

Chair Cooper, 

The Federal Raihoad Administration (FRA) is providing financial assistance to the No1th Dakota Department of 

Transpo1tation (NDDOT), the City of Minot (City), and the Minot Area Chamber Economic Development Corporation 

(EDC) for the proposed expansion of the Logistics Park ofN01th Dakota (Project). The Project is located at an 

approximately 800-acre industrial site in Minot, ND. The Project area is n01th ofWard County Road (CR) 12 and framed 

on the west side by Ward County CR 19 and east side by 55th Street NE. 

The Project is an unde1iaking subject to Section 106 ofthe National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as 

amended, and its implementing regulations 36 CFR Part 800 (Section 106). The pmpose ofthis letter is to follow up on 

the letter emailed to you on September 8, 2023 to initiate Section I 06 consultation for the Project to detemline ifthere are 

historic prope1ties ofcultural or religious significance to your T1ibe that may be affected by the Project. FRA is available 

for Government-to-Government consultation on this Project. 

You can find the FRA consultation letter and suppo1ting infonnation attached. We will also be sending this request 

info1mation by mail. 

• ra cher, Brandon (FRA); Styron, James D.; Steve Eberle; 

Baker, Becky 

Logistics Park of North Dakota (LPND) Minot, Ward County, ND; Section 106 Consultation and 

Please email your response to Kristen Zschomler at within 30 days. Ifyou have questions or 

wish to discuss the Project, Klisten can be reached at you for your cooperation on the Project. 

Thanks, 

Jen 

Jennifer Hanley, PE• 

Environmental Project Manager 

HDR 

51 North Broadway, Suite 550 

Far o ND 58102 

hdrinc.com/follow-us 

*MN, ND, SD, MT and TX 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Department 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

of Transportation 

C 

Washington, DC 20590 

Federal Railroad 

Administration 

January 12, 2023 

Mr. Durell Cooper 

Chairman 

Apache Tribe of Oklahoma 

511 East Colorado 

Anadarko, OK 73005 

RE: Logistics Park of North Dakota 

Minot, Ward County, ND 

Follow Up on Section 106 Consultation and Request for Information and Comment 

Dear Chairman Cooper, 

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is providing financial assistance to the North Dakota 

Department of Transportation (NDDOT), the City of Minot (City), and the Minot Area Chamber 

Economic Development Corporation (EDC) for the proposed expansion of the Logistics Park of North 

Dakota (Project). The Project is located at an approximately 800-acre industrial site in Minot, ND (see 

Attachment 1: Project Map). The Project area is north of Ward County Road (CR) 12 and framed on the 

west side by Ward County CR 19 and east side by 55th Street NE. 

The Project is an undertaking subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as 

amended, and its implementing regulations 36 CFR Part 800 (Section 106). The purpose of this letter is to 

follow up on the letter emailed to you on September 8, 2023 to initiate Section 106 consultation for the 

Project to determine if there are historic properties of cultural or religious significance to your Tribe that 

may be affected by the Project. FRA is available for Government-to-Government consultation on this 

Project. 

Project Background 

North Dakota did not have an intermodal terminal prior to the development of the LPND in 2020. A new 

intermodal site was identified and established in Minot and was proposed to be built in phases. In October 2020, 

intermodal rail service commenced at the new LPND with Rail Modal Group (RMG) operating the ramp, 

completing Phase I. Burlington Northern Sante Fe (BNSF) operated a terminal in Dilworth, Minnesota, near the 

North Dakota border that served intermodal access for at least the eastern half of North Dakota. It ceased 

operations in 2008. Consequently, North Dakota intermodal shippers were left to truck freight to Minneapolis (a 6-

hour drive from Bismarck; 7.5 hours from Minot) and Winnipeg (6.25 hours from Bismarck; 5 hours from Minot), 

only to be loaded in railcars and transported to the west coast for international export via the Port of Tacoma and 

Port of Seattle. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Several plans and studies have documented ways to best address the intermodal transportation services gap in 

North Dakota and include: NDDOT TransAction III, ND State Freight Plan, ND State Rail Plan, and an 

independent market analysis. Needs synthesized from these plans and studies can be categorized into three themes: 

demand; operations; and cost and linkage. They include: 

1) Accommodate existing and future freight demand in North Dakota (Demand) 

2) Provide operationally efficient transloading capabilities between truck and rail in North Dakota 

(Operations) 

3) Provide a competitively priced intermodal container rail service facility that connects North Dakota to 

international markets and key regional centers (Cost and Linkage) 

As part of the development and evaluation of alternatives for the Environmental Assessment (EA) for FRA’s 

compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), NDDOT, the City, the EDC, and FRA 

determined that locations outside of the city of Minot would not be reasonable alternatives and concluded that one 

of the build alternatives that expanded the current LPND would be feasible, reasonable, and would meet the 

Project’s purpose and need as defined in the EA. 

The Project sponsor consulted with the ND SHPO on previous phases of the Project (see Attachment 2: ND SHPO 

Ref: 22-5247 “Ackerman-Estvold: A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory for the Minot Intermodal Rail Yard in 

Ward County, North Dakota”). ND SHPO comment on December 28, 2021. 

Since then, Project plans have progressed, and the project’s description has been updated to reflect the updated design 

details. The Project, as proposed, is a conceptual plan that will be driven by free market and the businesses that will 

want to develop in the LPND expansion. Construction of the Project would be completed over time as individual 

sites are developed. 

Project Description 

Construction activities anticipated for the project include: 

• Two intermodal staging tracks, each capable of holding an 8,000+ foot-long intermodal train and two 5,000 

foot-long strip tracks immediately west of the Intermodal Facility. 

• A Patented Infinity Loop track layout servicing the proposed dry bulk, liquid bulk, and renewable facilities. 

• Dedicated facilities for liquid and dry bulk, renewables, intermodal, and transload operations – with rail 

capacities able to accommodate unit trains. 

• Numerous auxiliary tracks to support manifest operations as well miscellaneous rail infrastructure to support 

general rail operations. 

• A maintenance facility with vehicle/equipment maintenance bays, a maintenance manager office, storage 

space, and worker restrooms, showers, and lockers. 

• A curbed fueling area for maintenance vehicles and temporarily container storage. 

• Circulation roads for trucks during loading and unloading operations as well as to access the intermodal and 

transload tracks and the warehouse. 

• Employee and visitor parking. 

• Lighting to illuminate track areas, roadways, work areas, exterior storage areas, parking lots, exterior 

building doors and driveways from dusk to dawn. 

• Security cameras mounted on light structures along the perimeter of LPND and along the interior of the 

intermodal, transload, and warehouse areas. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Approx. eight-foot-tall chain link security fence installed around the LPND perimeter. 

• Underground utilities including water, sanitary, storm, communications, electric, gas, etc. 

Area of Potential Effects 

The Area of Potential Effects (APE), as defined in 36 CFR Part 800.16(d), is “the geographic area or areas within 

which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if 

any such properties exist. The area of potential effects is influenced by the scale and nature of an undertaking and 

may be different for different kinds of effects caused by the undertaking.” 

The APE consists of the area where the Project has the potential to cause effects on historic properties. FRA 

delineated the APE to reflect the nature, scale, and location of the entire Project (see Map 1 on Page 6 in 

Attachment 3: A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory for the Minot Intermodal Rail Yard in Ward County, North 

Dakota by Metcalf Archaeological Consultants). 

Identification of Historic Properties 

To identify historic properties in the APE, Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, who meet the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards reviewed available information, including a search of the site and 

manuscript files at the State Historical Society of North Dakota to determine if any cultural resources have been 

recorded or if any cultural resource inventories have been conducted within the APE and the surrounding mile. 

The site files search revealed that 33 cultural resources are recorded in the search area. These resources include one 

railroad, one airport, three other stone features, one cairn, seven isolated finds, nine buildings, four bridges, one 

fairground, and six site leads. Of these, none are located within the proposed APE, and six are within the Visual 

Impact area. 

Site 32WD1627 is outside the APE at the southeast corner. It is an abandoned segment of the Burlington Northern 

Railroad (Great Northern Railroad). The rail and ties have been removed and the berm serves as an unofficial 

roadway. Salas and Langsdon (2014) recommended it not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places 

(NRHP) due to its lack of association with railroad structures and integrity of design. Many segments of this 

railroad, including this one, have been recorded in North Dakota and submitted to the ND SHPO. This segment is 

considered a non-contributing element to the whole of the Burlington Northern Railroad site, according to the ND 

SHPO. 

The only previously noted possible precontact property that is close to the project area is site lead 32WDx87 to the 

southwest. This area has not been archaeologically surveyed and there has been no survey evidence that this 

cultural material scatter is in fact located in Section 20. The site lead form is a simple one-page form created in 

1980 by the ND SHPO based on a Map from a Work Projects Administration (WPA) Survey report. However, 

there is no other information on the form to indicate what map or what year this site was noted. No further 

information was located during a search of the National Archives. 

The remaining properties in the visual impact area are: 32WD1668, 32WD1669, 32WD1670, and 32WD1670. 

These are all residences recorded in 2009 by Aaron Barth. These are all modern structures that are not old enough 

to be considered for listing on the NRHP. 

All of the recorded properties south of the APE, and in the visual impact area, have been recommended not eligible 

for listing, and the ND SHPO has concurred during previous reviews. There are no eligible sites within three miles 

of the APE. 

The manuscript files search revealed that 37 cultural resource projects have been conducted in the search area. 

Investigations within the search area include one dam, six utilities, two city architectural surveys, ten roadways, 

two bridge research, one bridge replacement, four airport studies, four borrow areas, four flood protection, 
documentation ofthe Thad Hecker stuvey, and two previous smveys of the Inte1modal development. Po1t ions of 

the APE are overlapped by previous smveys: MS numbers 9632, 10916, 11094, 11873, 14116, and 17187. Three 

of these are related to the inte1modal project, two are highway related projects, and one is for a sanitary sewer. 

The Class III intensive pedestrian inventory was conducted on November 8-9, 2021. In all, 934.5 acres were 

inventoried at both a Class II visual inspection and any tmdisturbed areas at a Class III pedestrian swvey. Metcalf 

staff found a single isolated find (32WDx833) and two recent cultural manifestations (2011 AGT Foods facility 

and associated infrastiucture and a 2012 FEMA camp), neither ofwhich were recorded due to their recent origins. 

Request for Information and Comments 

FRA requests your review ofthe enclosed materials, providing any information you are willing to share regarding 

potential historic prope1ties ofreligious or cultural significance to your Tribe that may be present in the APE. FRA 

also invites your comments on the delineation of the APE and the appropriateness of the identification effo1ts for 

the unde1taking. If no historic properties are identified through consultation with yours and other federally 

recognized ti·ibes, based on the backgrotmd research and field swvey, FRA intends to make a finding of No 

Historic Properties Affected as per 36 CFR § 800.4(d)(l) by the Project as cmTently proposed . 

Please email your response to me within 30 da sat . If you have questions or wish to 

discuss the Project, I can be reached at or your cooperation. 

Sincerely, 

Kristen Zschomler, RP A 

Historian, Architectural Historian, and Registered-Professional Archaeologist 10341 

Environmental Protection Specialist - Cultural Resource Division - Major Projects Team 

Office of Environmental Program Management 

Enc: Attachment 1: Project Map 

Attachment 2: ND SHPO Ref: 22-5247 Ackerman-Estvold: A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory for 

the Minot Intennodal Rail Yard in Ward County, North Dakota 

Attachment 3: A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory for the Minot Intermodal Rail Yard in Ward 

County, North Dakota, 2023 

cc: Brandon Bratcher, FRA 

Jim Styron, NDDOT 

Jennifer Hanley, HDR 

Steve Eberle, Ackerman Estvold 
Telephone Record

Date: Thursday, February 22, 2024

Project: LPND

Call to: See Below Phone No: See Below

Call from: Becky Baker, HDR Phone No:

Tribal Consultation Subject:

Discussion, Agreement, and/or Action:

Apache Tribe of Oklahoma – call to THPO at 2/22/2024; Spoke

with Chalepah Sterling from

They do not have a designated THPO but the Environmental Department handles reviews. I 

emailed to him at the address above.

He said he would respond with a letter noting “If any cultural or archeological materials are 

found during construction, to contact the Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Environmental 

Department” I said I could put that in the EA based on this verbal discussion. He said that

would work and might not sent a letter, appreciating that we aren’t requesting a letter 

since his workload is high.

Fort Belknap Indian Community – call at THPO at 2/22/2024;

Called and voicemail was full, not able to leave a message.

Three Affiliated Tribes ‐

No THPO number on website so spoke to Environmental Division. I did leave a message and 

asked that they call back for coordination.